UKPOL.CO.UK

Tag: Gordon Marsden

  • Gordon Marsden – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    Gordon Marsden – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Gordon Marsden on 2014-06-26.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, pursuant to his comments of 18 June 2014, Official Report, column 127WH, on sulphur regulations, whether he has (a) commissioned and (b) received any specific assessment of the potential effect on diesel prices in the UK as a result of implementation of the new sulphur regulation limits.

    Stephen Hammond

    The Department has not had discussions with the trade unions specifically on the implementation of the sulphur rules. However, the trade unions have had the opportunity to contribute their views during the eight-week public consultation on the draft UK Regulations and the associated Impact Assessment which commenced on 29 April 2014.

    The maturity and efficacy of ship-board exhaust gas cleaning system technology was one of the key subjects under consideration when I chaired the ‘round table’ meetings of industry stakeholders in October 2012 and March 2013 to which I referred in my Answer of 17 June 2014. At those meetings, first-hand information was forthcoming from both the shipping industry and the exhaust gas cleaning system technology industry.

    The Department has engaged the European Commission about the potential impacts of the new regulations and the scope for financial support from EU sources, including finance from the European Investment Bank. The Commission has reaffirmed the possibility of support for the maritime sector through the new Connecting Europe Facility or the Trans-European Network (TEN-T) programme.

    The Department is investigating impacts on prices as part of its assessment of the impact of the draft UK Regulations.

    The Department will conduct the review at an appropriate time and not later than the timetable specified in the Regulations themselves, in accordance with normal Government practice and consistent with the principles of better regulation. It would be premature to make a commitment now concerning the precise timing of the review.

  • Gordon Marsden – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    Gordon Marsden – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Gordon Marsden on 2014-06-26.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, pursuant to the Answer of 17 June 2014, Official Report, column 536W, on shipping: exhaust emissions, what discussions his officials have had with the European Commission on securing EU finance to assist shipowners and ports to comply with the new sulphur regulation limits.

    Stephen Hammond

    The Department has not had discussions with the trade unions specifically on the implementation of the sulphur rules. However, the trade unions have had the opportunity to contribute their views during the eight-week public consultation on the draft UK Regulations and the associated Impact Assessment which commenced on 29 April 2014.

    The maturity and efficacy of ship-board exhaust gas cleaning system technology was one of the key subjects under consideration when I chaired the ‘round table’ meetings of industry stakeholders in October 2012 and March 2013 to which I referred in my Answer of 17 June 2014. At those meetings, first-hand information was forthcoming from both the shipping industry and the exhaust gas cleaning system technology industry.

    The Department has engaged the European Commission about the potential impacts of the new regulations and the scope for financial support from EU sources, including finance from the European Investment Bank. The Commission has reaffirmed the possibility of support for the maritime sector through the new Connecting Europe Facility or the Trans-European Network (TEN-T) programme.

    The Department is investigating impacts on prices as part of its assessment of the impact of the draft UK Regulations.

    The Department will conduct the review at an appropriate time and not later than the timetable specified in the Regulations themselves, in accordance with normal Government practice and consistent with the principles of better regulation. It would be premature to make a commitment now concerning the precise timing of the review.

  • Gordon Marsden – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    Gordon Marsden – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Gordon Marsden on 2015-02-20.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, with reference to the breakdown of Fareham Maritime Operations Centre’s VHF radio network on 2 February 2015, how long the breakdown lasted; which body of water was affected by the breakdown; which communications systems were affected by the breakdown; and what information his Department holds on attempts by vessels on the waters affected during the period of the breakdown to make contact with the Coastguard Service using the affected communications networks.

    Mr John Hayes

    There were no issues experienced with the VHF radio network on 2 February 2015.

    However, on 8 February 2015 there was a temporary reduction in HM Coastguard’s ability to broadcast on VHF Channel 16 from Marsland Mouth, Cornwall to Beachy Head, East Sussex and River Towey, Carmarthen to Mull of Galloway. This lasted for 1 hour 47 minutes.

    During this time the 999 service and the Global Maritime Distress and Safety System (GMDSS) Distress alert systems were unaffected. There was no reduction in HM Coastguard’s ability to task rescue resources, such as lifeboats, volunteer Coastguard Rescue Teams or SAR Helicopters, to any incident around the coast.

    HM Coastguard’s well established Business Continuity Plans allowed remedial action to be promptly undertaken and enabled vessels on the waters affected during the period of the breakdown to make contact with the Coastguard Service. The specific issue that caused the reduced ability to broadcast on VHF Channel 16 has now been resolved.

    The Coastguard services (VHF systems) are currently fit for purpose both (a) generally and (b) specifically for the new national network.

  • Gordon Marsden – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    Gordon Marsden – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Gordon Marsden on 2015-02-20.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, what assessment his Department has made of whether the Coastguard Service’s VHF radio systems are fit for purpose (a) generally and (b) in relation to the work of the Maritime Operations Centre at Fareham.

    Mr John Hayes

    There were no issues experienced with the VHF radio network on 2 February 2015.

    However, on 8 February 2015 there was a temporary reduction in HM Coastguard’s ability to broadcast on VHF Channel 16 from Marsland Mouth, Cornwall to Beachy Head, East Sussex and River Towey, Carmarthen to Mull of Galloway. This lasted for 1 hour 47 minutes.

    During this time the 999 service and the Global Maritime Distress and Safety System (GMDSS) Distress alert systems were unaffected. There was no reduction in HM Coastguard’s ability to task rescue resources, such as lifeboats, volunteer Coastguard Rescue Teams or SAR Helicopters, to any incident around the coast.

    HM Coastguard’s well established Business Continuity Plans allowed remedial action to be promptly undertaken and enabled vessels on the waters affected during the period of the breakdown to make contact with the Coastguard Service. The specific issue that caused the reduced ability to broadcast on VHF Channel 16 has now been resolved.

    The Coastguard services (VHF systems) are currently fit for purpose both (a) generally and (b) specifically for the new national network.

  • Gordon Marsden – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Gordon Marsden – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Gordon Marsden on 2015-02-11.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, with reference to the contribution of the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Health on 23 October 2014, Official Report, column 1142, what progress he has made on establishing the independent review of papers and evidence relating to oral hormone pregnancy tests; and when he plans to appoint a panel alongside the chair for that review.

    George Freeman

    The terms of reference for the review were endorsed by the Commission on Human Medicines in December 2014 and a suitable Chair for the panel has been identified. The areas of scientific expertise required for the review and suitable candidates within these disciplines have also been identified. The Government is in the process of obtaining all relevant documents and evidence for the review.

  • Gordon Marsden – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    Gordon Marsden – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Gordon Marsden on 2014-04-01.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, what the rationale was for the provisions in the Pensions Bill which allow employers to differentiate pension conditions between previous public sector employees now working in privatised companies and protected persons.

    Steve Webb

    The Pensions Bill creates a statutory override designed to allow employers, to a very limited extent, to make changes to the scheme to recover the increased cost of National Insurance that follows from the introduction of the single tier pension.

    Protected persons are a small group of individuals (approximately 60,000) employed in some formerly nationalised industries, namely rail, including Transport for London, electricity, coal, nuclear waste and decommissioning, where the employers are limited in their ability to change scheme rules by legislation made at the time of privatisation. This legislation prevents employers from making changes to the pension benefits offered to those employees who were previously employed by the State. The Pensions Bill reaffirms that restriction.

    This is a very different situation to other privatisations where a trust deed, rules or other undertaking was made at the time of privatisation, which was not endorsed by Parliament in the same way.

    The important distinction we have made is that where duties to restrict changes to the future pension rights of specific workers, in specific industries have been enshrined in law and endorsed by Parliament, the statutory override should not allow employers to disregard that legislation.

    It should also be noted that contractual agreements between public sector organisations and third parties, which may provide pension protection for staff now working in private companies, are not affected by the statutory override

  • Gordon Marsden – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    Gordon Marsden – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Gordon Marsden on 2014-04-01.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, what assessment he has made of whether an individual on the minimum wage for a full working lifetime will receive a higher retirement income under the new single tier pension system than under the existing pension system.

    Steve Webb

    It is not possible to answer this question, as in order to calculate how much state pension an individual may receive in retirement under the single-tier system, compared to the current system, it is necessary to make a considerable number of assumptions. For instance: when they reach State Pension age, whether they have been contracted-out of the Additional Pension, or how many years they live after retirement.

    Chapter 3 of the Single Tier Impact Assessment provides a detailed commentary on factors that are likely to influence whether someone is a notional gainer or loser compared to the current system.

    https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/254151/a-pensions-bill-single-tier-ia-oct-2013.pdf

    “

  • Gordon Marsden – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    Gordon Marsden – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Gordon Marsden on 2014-04-01.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, what assessment he has made of trends in (a) take-up of workplace pensions and (b) anticipated retirement income from current workplace pension accounts.

    Steve Webb

    a)

    Automatic enrolment is increasing the take-up of workplace pensions and will continue to do so as the reforms continue to be rolled out over the next few years. The latest figures from The Pensions Regulator show that over 3.2 million individuals have now been enrolled into a workplace pension as a result of the reforms.

    In 2013, 50 per cent of all employees were a member of a pension scheme, rising from 47 per cent in 2012. This was the first increase in participation since 2006 and represented the largest rise since records began in 1997. In particular, for the largest private sector companies (those with more than 5000 employees), 51 per cent of employees were members of a workplace pension scheme, up from 36 per cent in 2012. These figures were collected in April 2013 when automatic enrolment had been running for just 6 months.

    (b)

    Without automatic enrolment, median private pension income was expected to fall from around £3,900 a year in 2020 to around £2,200 a year in 2050. However, with automatic enrolment the median private pension income is expected to be around £3,600 by 2050.

  • Gordon Marsden – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    Gordon Marsden – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Gordon Marsden on 2014-04-01.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, whether the performance of the Pensions Regulator is assessed in relation to trends in (a) take-up of workplace pensions and (b) anticipated retirement income from current workplace pension accounts.

    Steve Webb

    The Pensions Regulator pursues five main objectives as set out in section 5 of the Pensions Act 2004. These objectives include the protection of benefits to the members of work-based pensions schemes. The Pensions Regulator’s key performance indicators are designed to operate in support of its statutory objectives.

  • Gordon Marsden – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    Gordon Marsden – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Gordon Marsden on 2014-04-07.

    To ask Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer, how many times failure to pay the minimum wage has been (a) reported, (b) prosecuted and (c) penalised in the maritime sector since the Equality Act 2010 came into force.

    Mr David Gauke

    The Government takes the enforcement of national minimum wage (NMW) legislation very seriously and HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) enforce the NMW legislation on behalf of the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills (BIS) and has done so since the introduction of NMW in April 1999.

    HMRC investigates all complaints made about employers suspected of not paying the minimum wage, in addition carrying out targeted enforcement where it identifies a high risk of non-payment of NMW across the whole of the UK.

    Since 2006, HMRC started considering prosecution for minimum wage offences. Since then, there have been 7 investigations into employers in the Water Transport sector. None of these were identified as having failed to pay the minimum wage.